How good was Paul Scholes?

He wasnt forced to retire from England. He chose to retire to spend more time with his family.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/3531982.stm

He later turned down the chance to come out of retirement.

Sone.people make out as if he was small time enough a character to retire because he could not.play in his favourite position.
 
TheReligion said:
Scholes has a better international record if you look at the numbers
Click to expand...
What numbers exactly?

littleman said:
Are those quotes from Xavi and Zidane unembellished? I read them when they first came out and it wasn't close to this degree of reverence. It seems like the quotes get exaggerated with time.
Click to expand...
There are quite recent articles which talk about Xavi and Zidane selecting their alltime PL XI.
Although their quotes aren't quite as spectacular as those above indeed both included Scholes in their team and praise his ability.

Now what's interesting is that Zidane seems to think highly of Gerrard too.


Zidane

Steven Gerrard:
“For a time he was the best midfield player in the world. I told Madrid I wanted to play alongside him, but he was loyal to Liverpool.

“That was lucky for them, because he was a pleasure to watch and the complete midfield player.”

Paul Scholes:
“There is very little I can say about Paul Scholes, because if you have ever seen him play, then you don’t need me to tell you how good he was.

“One of my favourite players from any era, he was a player who made the hardest things look so easy.”

Xavi

Paul Scholes:
“Technically the best English player since Matt Le Tissier, who I grew up watching. Just unbelievably gifted. Every time I played against him or watched him on TV he made everything look so easy. I’ve never seen anyone make playing that well look so effortless.”

Frank Lampard:
“One of the few midfield players in the world with the goal-scoring record of a striker. To consistently score the goals he has from midfield is such an achievement, and technically he’s excellent too.”

Steven Gerrard:
“John Barnes was one of the first midfield players I remember watching and appreciating his technical skill. Gerrard is just as good and, like Frank [Lampard], he has every attribute you need to be a Barcelona player.”


Quite disingenuous by the people who love using quote arguments (personally I'm not a fan of it at all for the obvious reason that it's heavily cherrypicking. There are a lot of players/pundits, giving a lot of interviews, some prone to changing opinions) to select someone as an authority, but only consider his opinions which you like and sweep the rest under the rug.

Don't misunderstand this as questioning Scholes' quality - I'm just pointing out the flaws with the methodology used.
 
I think Scholes was easily as good as Xavi, Pirlo et al. It's crazy not to have him in that bracket.

Key facts:

1) more goals. Almost double in fact.

2) more assists

3) more club honours (although you have to be impressed with Xavi on international level)

My opinion:

1) Scholes was a more accurate long passer of the ball. Literally the best ever.

2) Scholes was a better striker of the ball. He was also good in the air.

3) Xavi was a better short passer, more intricate link ups etc

4) Xavi was a better dribbler.

Both top players but I think Scholes could do pretty much everything Xavi could but in a much more physical and challenging league.
 
Scholes was underrated because he is rarely the best midfielder in the team because his best seasons comes with a dominant player in Keane. And IIRC, he's ascension to a great midfielder comes in several steps. He was a second striker when he was coming up, but converted to central mid when Keane broke his leg and missed most of 1997-1998 season. He was good, but he's not the complete midfielder yet. Even when on the treble season, he's not a controlling midfielder, he was more of an attacking midfielder who pops in with goals from time to time. The metronome role was played by Keane. It was him who controlled the pace of our game. This is becoming more evindent when he played behind Ruud in the 2002-2003 season.
IMO, Scholes only become the great controlling midfielder when he played with Carrick. I think he always had it in him to do it, but rarely does it because his role in the team rarely required him to do so regularly with Keane around.

Now with England, Scholes role as an attacking midfielder who scores goals is being compared with Gerrard and Lampard. They gain the upperhand because they were more dominant in their team even though they're not as good. In Gerrard case it was because he was the best player in a worse Liverpool team than United, and Lampard, because his goalscoring record from midfield is superior to Scholes. England missed a trick when after 2006-2007 season it was clear that he was the tempo controlling midfielder that England desperately required in international tournaments. They should build the team around his playmaking skills and they should qualified for the 2008 Euro if they do so.
 
Scholes was irreplaceable. If he'd have played further forward, he could have been a 'pure' goalscorer like Lampard. Dropping deep he could control the play, spread the play. I think he's severely underrated. Even though he was small, he was never bullied unlike Carrick at times. He was also good in the air and a reliable goalscorer. He was mismanaged by England who tried to fit them all in and never appreciated Scholes ability to control the play. He could have played in Barcelonas best ever team and in Frances world cup team and they would not have suffered. In the premership to be a technical player when there is no pause to the game unlike other countries is great. No winter breaks. He was consistent.
 
reelworld said:
Scholes was underrated because he is rarely the best midfielder in the team because his best seasons comes with a dominant player in Keane. And IIRC, he's ascension to a great midfielder comes in several steps. He was a second striker when he was coming up, but converted to central mid when Keane broke his leg and missed most of 1997-1998 season. He was good, but he's not the complete midfielder yet. Even when on the treble season, he's not a controlling midfielder, he was more of an attacking midfielder who pops in with goals from time to time. The metronome role was played by Keane. It was him who controlled the pace of our game. This is becoming more evindent when he played behind Ruud in the 2002-2003 season.
IMO, Scholes only become the great controlling midfielder when he played with Carrick. I think he always had it in him to do it, but rarely does it because his role in the team rarely required him to do so regularly with Keane around.

Now with England, Scholes role as an attacking midfielder who scores goals is being compared with Gerrard and Lampard. They gain the upperhand because they were more dominant in their team even though they're not as good. In Gerrard case it was because he was the best player in a worse Liverpool team than United, and Lampard, because his goalscoring record from midfield is superior to Scholes. England missed a trick when after 2006-2007 season it was clear that he was the tempo controlling midfielder that England desperately required in international tournaments. They should build the team around his playmaking skills and they should qualified for the 2008 Euro if they do so.
Click to expand...

That's a good analysis of his changing roles over the years.
 
TheReligion said:
I think Scholes was easily as good as Xavi, Pirlo et al. It's crazy not to have him in that bracket.

Key facts:

1) more goals. Almost double in fact.

2) more assists

3) more club honours (although you have to be impressed with Xavi on international level)

My opinion:

1) Scholes was a more accurate long passer of the ball. Literally the best ever.

2) Scholes was a better striker of the ball. He was also good in the air.

3) Xavi was a better short passer, more intricate link ups etc

4) Xavi was a better dribbler.

Both top players but I think Scholes could do pretty much everything Xavi could but in a much more physical and challenging league.
Click to expand...

Doesn't Xavi hold the record for assists in a season or something like that?
 
Paul Scholes was unreal. Put it this way, that game against City at the weekend...they wouldn't get near him. This is what pogba should aspire to be.

Of all the past United players i miss him the most. You get maverick attackers regularly, but I've rarely seen a midfielder that could do what Scholes could do. His passing was outrageously good. His awareness meant that he pretty much knew where everybody was at all times, both opposition and team mates.

What an underrated player he is. He should be remembered with the greats.
 
Great player but starting to get quite a bit overrated since his retirement, especially by United fans.

Comfortably better than Scholes: Xavi, Iniesta, Modric

Comparable to Scholes: Alonso, Pirlo, Gerrard, Kroos, Silva, Schweinsteiger, Busquets
 
Last edited:
An absolute gift from the gods, Paul Scholes was, is, a special special player.

Without question in the same bracket as Xavi, Pirlo, Kroos, Modric, etc in actual fact probably better than those 3 and others in the same role, because he use to bang goals in for fun, club and country.

This guy could ping a ball!
 
pocco said:
Paul Scholes was unreal. Put it this way, that game against City at the weekend...they wouldn't get near him. This is what pogba should aspire to be.

Of all the past United players i miss him the most. You get maverick attackers regularly, but I've rarely seen a midfielder that could do what Scholes could do. His passing was outrageously good. His awareness meant that he pretty much knew where everybody was at all times, both opposition and team mates.

What an underrated player he is. He should be remembered with the greats.
Click to expand...

This.
 
XH6 said:
Great player but starting to get quite a bit overrated since his retirement, especially by United fans.

Comfortably better than Scholes: Xavi, Iniesta, Modric

Comparable to Scholes: Alonso, Pirlo, Gerrard, Kroos, Silva, Schweinsteiger, Busquets
Click to expand...
Nice try.
 
VanGaalEra said:
Toni Kroos has spoken

Click to expand...

It's no coincidence that pretty much all the great midfielders that have played the game admire Scholes and think he's comfortably better than Gerrard and Lampard. It's a ridiculous comparison only made by English media and rival fans.
 
I rate Xavi, Iniesta, Pirlo, Modric and Kroos higher.

That makes him the 6th best midfielder of the 21st century.

(I don’t count #10s like Zidane or Kaka)
 
Infordin said:
I rate Xavi, Iniesta, Pirlo, Modric and Kroos higher.

That makes him the 6th best midfielder of the 21st century.

(I don’t count #10s like Zidane or Kaka)
Click to expand...
What makes you rate Kroos and Modric higher?
 
Tom Van Persie said:
It's no coincidence that pretty much all the great midfielders that have played the game admire Scholes and think he's comfortably better than Gerrard and Lampard. It's a ridiculous comparison only made by English media and rival fans.
Click to expand...
That's just not true now is it. You'd struggle to find a quote where someone says he was better than the others. All were great players in their own right, different players though. The type of player Scholes was became fashionable during Barca days.
 
RooneyLegend said:
Teams dominate tournaments, not individuals.
Click to expand...
Modric and Kroos are two of the most important members of that team. Real destroyed Juventus in the final and they were the biggest reasons behind that. Ronaldo scored the goals, but Real won the game in midfield. Juve couldn’t get the ball off them.

I think that by the time Modric and especially Kroos finish their career, there won’t be much doubt about whether they were better players than Scholes.
 
Infordin said:
Modric and Kroos are two of the most important members of that team. Real destroyed Juventus in the final and they were the biggest reasons behind that. Ronaldo scored the goals, but Real won the game in midfield. Juve couldn’t get the ball off them.

I think that by the time Modric and especially Kroos finish their career, there won’t be much doubt about whether they were better players than Scholes.
Click to expand...

Agree. As good as Scholes was, he never had as big an influence on his team as players like Xavi, Iniesta, Modric, Kroos, or Pirlo. Some of that is due to United's style of play not suiting a player like Scholes quite as well, but there's a reason why he won such few individual awards over the course of his career.
 
Infordin said:
Modric and Kroos are two of the most important members of that team. Real destroyed Juventus in the final and they were the biggest reasons behind that. Ronaldo scored the goals, but Real won the game in midfield. Juve couldn’t get the ball off them.

I think that by the time Modric and especially Kroos finish their career, there won’t be much doubt about whether they were better players than Scholes.
Click to expand...

I agree. Casemiro, Modric and Kroos > Keane and Scholes or Carrick and Scholes any day of the week.

That's to say three will always be better than two.
 
Infordin said:
Modric and Kroos are two of the most important members of that team. Real destroyed Juventus in the final and they were the biggest reasons behind that. Ronaldo scored the goals, but Real won the game in midfield. Juve couldn’t get the ball off them.

I think that by the time Modric and especially Kroos finish their career, there won’t be much doubt about whether they were better players than Scholes.
Click to expand...
As a Unit Real Madrid was better on the ball than what Juve were on the day. Do you honestly believe if you took Kroos out of that team and put Scholes in they wouldn't have kept the ball as easily as they did?

Take Modric for example, he used to be just as good at retaining the ball at Spurs but the team still wouldn't be able to keep the ball as easily.

Pirlo, despite his efforts couldn't get the lessor gifted Italian players to stop giving the ball away to the opposition.

They had a Kroos, Isco, Modric and Casemiro midfield triadent vs Pjanic and Khedira in midfield, who do you think is going to dominate that part of the pitch? You could swap Pjanic for prime Xavi and its still a non contest.

What I find strange is you're trying to use what is probably Scholes' best quality and trying to claim they are better than him cause their team managed to do that better than what Juve could as a Unit.

What I'd want to hear is what makes them as individuals better than Scholes in order for them to be considered better than he was. Name me one attribute that Kroos is better than Scholes, trust me it isn't ball retention .
 
XH6 said:
Great player but starting to get quite a bit overrated since his retirement, especially by United fans.

Comfortably better than Scholes: Xavi, Iniesta, Modric

Comparable to Scholes: Alonso, Pirlo, Gerrard, Kroos, Silva, Schweinsteiger, Busquets
Click to expand...

Overrated? He was the one and only English midfielder who dominated the midfield for decades. He was simply the best. Word Class is an understatement.
 
XH6 said:
Agree. As good as Scholes was, he never had as big an influence on his team as players like Xavi, Iniesta, Modric, Kroos, or Pirlo. Some of that is due to United's style of play not suiting a player like Scholes quite as well, but there's a reason why he won such few individual awards over the course of his career.
Click to expand...

Xavi and Iniesta was busy feeding Messi with Iniesta occasionally score important goals. I get that, big influence.
Modric and Kroos is a midfield unit with world class players in front of him. Kroos and Modric didn't get the headlines.
Pirlo didn't do glorified jobs either.

But they all had big influence to win games by making that midfield ticking.

Scholes was the quiet brilliance in Fergie's team, and he did have one of the biggest influence on how we won so many things with playing fast counter attacking football. When we lost Scholes, we played boring football and struggled.
 
XH6 said:
Great player but starting to get quite a bit overrated since his retirement, especially by United fans.

Comfortably better than Scholes: Xavi, Iniesta, Modric

Comparable to Scholes: Alonso, Pirlo, Gerrard, Kroos, Silva, Schweinsteiger, Busquets
Click to expand...
You are 20 years old. You did not grow up watching him play, that much is clear.

Scholes was a genius and our midfield has been barren without him. Irreplaceable player.
 
"Modric comfortably better than Scholes"... :lol:

No one is comfortably better than Scholes. You can make a case for Xavi being better, fair enough. But Scholes' vision, passing, intelligence, control of midfield, awareness, etc. was up there with the best.
 
Infordin said:
They’ve dominated the Champions League in a way Scholes never did.
Click to expand...

Like @RooneyLegend said, teams dominate, not individuals. Are you going to tell us Suarez, Benzema are better than Ronaldo as Ronaldo never won CL?
 
roonster09 said:
Like @RooneyLegend said, teams dominate, not individuals. Are you going to tell us Suarez, Benzema are better than Ronaldo as Ronaldo never won CL?
Click to expand...
Yes, people seem to take pleasure in wummingly downplaying Scholes... seems the new 'in' thing to do around here.

The fact is he was absolutely integral to our domination of the Premier League under Ferguson. As well as our CL success, as 'limited' as it was.
 
(whispers) Was their a great player who was dropped for big games as much as Scholes was?

He was great and better than Lampard and Gerrard but, they way people here talk about him is almost cult like.
 
During Scholes' 20 seasons at MU, 14 different players won United's player of the year award, Scholes was never one of them.

If Scholes was in his prime right now, would Pep swap Silva or De Bruyne for him? Would Zidane swap Modric or Kroos for him? Personally, I don't think so.
 
Keeps It tidy said:
(whispers) Was their a great player who was dropped for big games as much as Scholes was?

He was great and better than Lampard and Gerrard but, they way people here talk about him is almost cult like.
Click to expand...
Which big games? He started in 2007-08 Cl finals, 35 year old Scholes was on bench in CL finals just like 34 year old Xavi was on bench in CL finals.

Scholes wasn't the same player and wasn't surprising he was benched in his mid 30s.
 
XH6 said:
During Scholes' 20 seasons at MU, 14 different players won United's player of the year award, Scholes was never one of them.

If Scholes was in his prime right now, would Pep swap Silva or De Bruyne for him? Would Zidane swap Modric or Kroos for him? Personally, I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Personally I think you never watched Scholes play and read his wiki page and started posting about him.

To answer your questions, Madrid wouldn't have signed Kroos if they had Scholes at his peak. KdB and Silva are different type of players, attacking midfielders compared with Center midfielders.
 
roonster09 said:
Personally I think you never watched Scholes play and read his wiki page and started posting about him.

To answer your questions, Madrid wouldn't have signed Kroos if they had Scholes at his peak. KdB and Silva are different type of players, attacking midfielders compared with Center midfielders.
Click to expand...

Interesting comment when you consider how Scholes only became as good as Xavi due to a bunch of fake quotes and youtube videos of him hitting 60 yard hollywood passes to the wing.

I agree that Madrid wouldn't have signed Kroos if they had Scholes; I don't think one is necessarily an upgrade on the other. I'm not trying to argue that Scholes was bad or not world class. My only point of contention is that despite being in the same bracket as players like Kroos or Alonso (imo), he seems to get elevated far above that due to reasons (fake quotes, etc) other than his actual quality and performance level on the field.
 
Last edited:
XH6 said:
Interesting comment when you consider how Scholes only became as good as Xavi due to a bunch of fake quotes and youtube videos of him hitting 60 yard hollywood passes to the wing.

.
Click to expand...

Not sure where to start with this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.